otto wrote:
Can anyone explain how this works optically? "Light fields" sound up there with midichlorians. Is it just a processor-heavy sharpening tech or is it properly deep depth of field? Sounds gimmicky tbh.

I think the layman's version is that you have a grid of small lenses set up so that you're taking multiple focal lengths at the same time. You end up with an image that is tiny compared to the pixel count of the sensor but there's oodles of depth information in the file.

Actually, that's a neat point henro: in a lot of the scientific microscopes for imaging cells and whatnot, depth is a pain in the arse, as you have to do multiple scans. That said, I can't imagine this tech is going to be useable on a macro/nanoscale... I imagine medical circles use cameras more than photography too.

If it takes a picture of all focal lengths every time, could it be used to improve 3D photography/cinematography? I'm picturing some kind of tech where the image can focus itself correctly based on where you're looking at any time. One of the issues with modern 3D films is that you have to be looking exactly where the director wants you to in order for it to fuly work - this could overcome that shortfall

It is fantastic tech, but also a missed opportunity IMO. Who's going to spend $500 on it?

They're marketing it as a social media tool - how do you do that if you *have* to edit it before you can post it? Social media users want to snap an image and send it to Facebook, that's it. It's actually MORE hassle. Smartphones are where it's at there.

Photographers might like it, but don't most photographers hate postprocessing, the skill's all in the shot? Does this not take that away? A photographer will surely want a DSLR.

That's why I see it as a shame, and a missed opportunity. Licence the tech, and it'll be in every camera as an option. Light field mode or something. While I'd love to be able to adjust the focus on an image after the event, it'd be better if you still had the ability to focus using the camera itself. As it stands, you're losing convenience.

It's really impressive how the CEO did his dissertation at Stanford on light fields and had the nous to set up the company and actually bring it to market, but if Olympus, Kodak, Sony etc were all involved, costs would plummet and it'd go mass-market.